QRA TA

 A

One of Ramana Maharshi's teachings is to surrender to god. But when surrendering happens, who is it that surrenders? Because if one tries to surrender, isnt that assuming that there is a separate self who has control?

Yes, if ‘one’ tries to surrender, it assumes there is a ‘separate doer’ who has control.

Even as Ramana and others just got finished telling us there are no ‘separate entities’ and no separate doer.:-)🥺

How confusing!

The reason it’s confusing is because ‘mind’ is asking these questions, and ‘mind’ is trying to parse “who” it is that surrenders. Can’t happen.

The dualistic subject-object-confined mind can never pierce non-duality or Oneness.

Even if we say ‘no one’ surrenders to Nothing, or it’s just Being plaything with Itself, the best mind will do is say, “Er…um…yes, I guess I understand that??”

For ‘mind,’ there is another flawed assumption already in place. That is that “we,” the illusory separate self, need to rejoin God or Being (that we are never separate from,) and can follow ‘written’ scriptures or sages quotes literally, to learn how to do this illusory rejoining and catalyze this unnecessary, undoable attainment.

Trying to bushwhack a path to enlightenment through ‘precise’ interpretation of Ramana’s - or Buddha’s or Osho’s or Krishna’s - spoken words only ushers the mind into hopeless circles and produce no enlightenment or God-realization.

Especially when you realize that Ramana also said”

“The only true answer is Silence.” and ““The Self is always the Self and there is no such thing as ‘attaining it’ or surrendering to it. Who is to ‘attain’ what, who is to surrender to what, and how, when all that exists is the Self?”

And Buddha said:

“If you meet the Buddha on the road, don’t ask him ‘how,’ just kill him.”

And

“Don’t beleive a word anyone says, including me.’

A